Ford Focus 2011 vs Mazda 6 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 165 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.4 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Mazda 6 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Focus engine produces 15 HP less power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 15 NM less than Mazda 6. Due to the lower power, Ford Focus reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Focus is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Focus consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that by driving the Ford Focus over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Focus consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 1120 km on highway | 1300 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 460'000 km | 390'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Ford Focus engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Ford C-Max, Ford Fiesta, Ford B-Max | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Ford Focus might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mazda 6 2010 1.8 engine: The engine often has an unstable idle speed. The thermostat, cooling pump, and alternator are weak points. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.53 m | 4.76 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.44 m | |
| Ford Focus is 22 cm shorter than the Mazda 6, 3 cm wider, while the height of Ford Focus is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 475 litres | 519 litres | |
|
Mazda 6 has more luggage space. Ford Focus has 44 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Focus is 0.8 metres less than that of the Mazda 6, which means Ford Focus can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`825 | 1`885 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Focus has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 4800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Focus has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |